The topic of this blog post references a post made by a newer Black Templars player on B&C (we'll call him P), who is attempting to help a brand new player with his army.  I initially replied by offering up Implausible Nature as a resource, noting that it was teaching competitiveness and it might not be for him, but that it still might provide useful information to him as a player.  In addition, I invited the new player to ask any further questions he may have, as most players are more than willing to assist in that respect.

Shortly after I made my comments in the thread, P made his reply, and it started off so great.  He provided his opinions based on his experiences.  Then he attacked me.  Fortunately, I got a screen-shot before he edited his post to a slightly nicer version.
Really?  Do you need to do that?  Everyone knows I play competitively.  But what I do is not bad.  I am not damaging to the community, and I don't take the fun out of the game.  I simply interpret the game differently than you and I enjoy it, as do a great many others.  That doesn't make it wrong.  It is just different from you.  Who are you to tell me what is fluffy for my own #%&@ army?

My priority in the 40k hobby is, first and foremost, to have fun.  If I didn't, I'd not be here.  Yes, I try my best to win.  Do I need to win?  No.  I love a hard fought battle, but I won't get all bent out of shape if I lose.  And I certainly do not go out of my way to crush new players, simply out of the desire to win.  In fact, I spend a great deal of time teaching players how to become better.  What do you think the whole point of this website is for?!?

Don't stick me in the stereotype when you obviously have spent zero time trying to understand my motives.  If you don't like what I say here, or don't agree with it, that's fine.  I don't force my ideas down people's throats.  Simply walk away.  I have no "agenda" other than my desire to teach people.  I gain nothing for doing this, other than the satisfaction of knowing I helped someone out.  There is no money, no real power, no stampeding herds of beautiful women.  I run Implausible Nature because I enjoy helping others.  That's it.

To me, it seems like you are the one who is afraid to step outside of the box.  I have never criticized someone's desire to build armies based on the BT background (or their armies period).  Ever.  I am perfectly happy to see players using armies simply because they enjoy how they look on the battlefield.  I totally respect that.  When I object, it is when some of those players tell me that these armies are competitive and fine-tuned tournament lists.  At that point, I have to show why they are not (though some are), as that is part of the mission statement of Implausible Nature.  It is not me attacking those players in any way, shape, or form.

In addition, I have never stated that I refuse to play "fluffy" armies.  I have SEVERAL listed here on the website.  What do you want from me?  I really frustrates me that because I have a single gunline army, everyone focuses on that, and paints me as some bad guy.

What.  The.  Hell.  Is.  That?

Is that what we want to be teaching new players in the game?  Come on now.  Grow up.  Things like these are derisive to the hobby.  Learn to see things from other players prospective.  I respect my fellow gamers, no matter where their play-style lies.  I expect the same from others.

/rant
 


Comments

02/24/2011 8:35am

That's the way it is with some people Laeroth. You told me once yourself that there are some people who are so fixated in their ways that they cannot see the light of reason from any other perspective.

Ultimately, you know what your goals and motives are, and those with the openness and willingness to learn and to understand, won't take these kind of derisive or damaging comments at face value. They'll do their own research, verify the facts, and come to their own conclusion.

As you encourage players to do the same, have faith that others will do the same of you.


-DV8-

Reply
Trignama
02/24/2011 8:53am

Yo ML don't let hime get under your skin. I have read all of IN I have seen all of your lists read all of your articles, and it doesn't seem to me that you put a blast on cc oriented templar lists. You in fact do the opposite in quite a few of your posts claiming they are competitive in a casual environment.

I don't have much tournament experience but I can totally understand where you come from saying the BT gunline is better suited at winning in that type of setting. The amount of firepower that a BT list can put out if built right is retarded now. I feel people should be looking at it as a strength, another tool that if you choose can be utilized.

As far as your CC oriented lists go, they are quite well built. I use the mechanized all comers list you came up with, using a few minor tweaks, and I have been very successful with it. I played in a tournament (pre faq) mind you it was my first, using said list. Out of 15 players I placed 6th overall. Not to bad I would think considering it was my first tourny. And again it was using one of your CC lists.

So just remember that as many people who are gonna give you crap that are out there, I'm sure you have 5 supporters to have your back. Do your thing, keep your head up and keep the advice coming. You completely turned around my experience using templars and you have my undying gratitude.

Reply
Cory
02/24/2011 10:55am

Lol I hope I didn't come off that harsh when I first emailed you..
His tactics from what he says seem weak anyway, good luck playing other mech armies with an army like that.

Reply
02/25/2011 3:57am

@DV8; You speak truth. Admittedly, the blatant attack probably got me a bit more worked up that I should have allowed for. It broke my supposedly trademark "cool", though it was on the privacy of IN. Won't happen again.

@Trig; I appreciate the compliments, and those that read and support what I'm doing here. I do try the best I can to put out relevant content for people. While I might be a bit too blunt or brash for some, it is presented in a way that I feel promotes learning, even if they don't buy into everything I say.

I was joking around with Brother Loring a few weeks ago about how I didn't know how I've not had any trolls/haters yet. IN is successful enough to where it was quite surprising that it'd not happened yet. I think I spoke too soon, but now that I've dealt with my first, I can move past it and ignore the naysayers that come along. :)

@Cory; Nah, don't worry about it. You stirred the pot a little bit, but it felt more like an exam problem to solve. Not bad at all. P, on the other hand, was simply trying to maliciously discredit me. And I wasn't okay with that.

Fortunately, I had enough sense not to reply in that thread. Especially a thread of a brand new player, who is looking for advice on how to build his army.

Reply
02/25/2011 11:24pm

Heh, I vented somewhere, not sure if it was here or one of the B&C threads over "competitive" vs. "fluffy".

Sorry to anyone who thinks otherwise, but a BT gunline is fluffy. If anything, my assault heavy pod builds with Intiates and Neophytes tricked out with BP/CCW are at least as "unfluffy" (according to the codex) as a gunline.

The problem is some great iconic art that shows melee oriented Templar scenes and evidently one of the best builds in the last edition was Templorks.

If we decide we want to savage Marshal Laeroth over how he builds his list(s), then let us do so, but there is no "partly" anywhere, the entire "blame" for this state of affairs is GW. Nobody else. They control the rules, they are the ones running up the price of the models so that even I don't want to overspend on them. Amusing how a number of mini companies didn't raise prices at the first of the year, but GW did like clockwork.

If anyone thinks the problem is "partly" too much competitiveness, then I'm sure I can find them a nice rocking chair, quilt and cup of tea so they can sit around the fire with the other old women and gossip about fluff in the good old days.

I don't know about the bigger tournaments, but I do know that a couple of simple ideas for local tournaments have the guys here interested. 2k battles, but with random teams bringing 1k each to the table. No more than one of a type of unit in a FOC slot (this one needs some work), but if you can only bring 1 Dread, 1 Term squad and 1 something else Elite, what do you do with a list now.

I've got some advice for anyone who is afraid to lose...get over it. I'm trying to learn the winning habits, and I'm losing to gain them. What do you do after a game? "GG, see ya."? Or you do you have the following conversation:
"GG, but now comes the hard part."
<a wary or blank look>
"What did I do wrong and how could I do it better?"

Wow, what a concept. You even get help from the spectators on pointing variant tactics out.

Oh crap, I vented again.

Reply
Cerrik
02/26/2011 11:25pm

As far as I'm concerned about the competitive factor of 40K... its a game, there has to be a winner and a loser (For the most part). I enjoy playing competitive list builds and I enjoy playing against them. I don't play in the tourney circuit because I prefer a more laid back atmosphere than most gaming tournaments provide. Doesn't mean I won't help a player out with a game or two to tune his list for a local if asked. The problem (as I see it) is that those who view competitive nature as a problem. It should be nurtured to varying degrees. I don't "know" anyone who goes into any game saying, "Boy I sure hope I can get my ass kicked today. I really don't want to win."

And just because I don't know anyone like that, does not mean they don't actually exist. But I doubt they would drop hundreds of dollars on minis just to hope they fail each and every game. :)

Reply
03/02/2011 10:20am

"And just because I don't know anyone like that, does not mean they don't actually exist. But I doubt they would drop hundreds of dollars on minis just to hope they fail each and every game. :)"

Well, I did. At least in the short term..
Face it, if you want to learn you learn more from defeat than victory. ;)

Reply



Leave a Reply